Until now, many sexual assault survivors have experienced obstacles in their attempt to receive a rape kit examination, as well as frustration with the process that follows. The kit itself consists of a medical examination conducted by trained healthcare professionals to collect and preserve forensic evidence following a sexual assault. Survivors have been burdened with fees, as well as kits that were never examined due to lack of government funds. Some kits were destroyed without prior notification or permission, potentially causing the loss of information that could have resulted in some glimmer of justice.

According to a February 2016 interview with the Guardian, Nguyen was sexually assaulted in October 2014, went through a rape kit examination, and submitted the evidence to Massachusetts. Massachusetts law states that a survivor has 15 years to pursue legal action. However, Nguyen recounts that a pamphlet she received while at the hospital said that she would have to file an extension request if she wanted her test to be preserved for longer than six months, after which time it would be destroyed.

With just the aforementioned information in hand, Nguyen had to do some digging in order to figure out how to file such an extension. To this day, she repeats this process of requesting another extension every six months. Such experiences helped to inspire Nguyen to take action, for herself and for other survivors.

“The system essentially makes me live my life by date of rape,” said Nguyen.

—

As reported by Mother Jones, the recently passed measure focuses on the collection and preservation of rape kits, ensuring that survivors will not be charged for or be prevented from getting a rape kit examination, even if they have yet to decide whether or not to pursue legal action. Additionally, once the examination has been completed, the kits must be preserved until the applicable statute of limitations runs out, at no cost to the survivor.

Survivors will also be able to request that authorities notify them before destroying their rape kits, with an option of requesting that they continue to be preserved. The measure goes further in guaranteeing survivors the right to be notified of the examination results, including a DNA profiling match and toxicology report. Regardless of whether or not the survivor decides to pursue legal action, they must be informed of their rights.

—

Nguyen reached out to Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) to help bring her vision to fruition. “Sexual assault remains one of the most underreported crimes and I hope that these basic rights will encourage more survivors to come forward and pursue justice,” said Shaheen in a statement regarding the Act.

In a statement to Buzzfeed news, Nguyen said: “At the heart of this is a deep belief of equality under the law and making sure that when survivors do choose to engage with the justice system that they are met with something that is fair.”

With advocates like Nguyen and Shaheen, we can hope that survivors are met with a justice system that works with them in the aftermath of a sexual assault, rather than having them feel as though it’s against them.

Along with these new rights for survivors, BuzzFeed news reports that the law also calls for “a working group run by the U.S. attorney general and the secretary of health and human services to develop and disseminate to local agencies the best practices for preservation of forensic evidence and treatment of survivors.”

“Half of the battle was getting these civil rights codified, the other half is making sure there is implementation on the ground and enforcement of these rights,” Nguyen told BuzzFeed News.

Nguyen said that she and Rise are going to continue working on reforms at the state level in an effort to improve how law enforcement handles sexual assaults.

Understanding why students are hesitant to report sexual assault is the first step to building better, more supportive responses.

College and university administrators are working hard to improve how they handle student sexual assaults by reworking their student handbooks, reconsidering their disciplinary procedures, and retraining their faculty and staff. Unfortunately, the impact of these efforts and improvements can go unnoticed. According to a BJS study, “more than 3 in 4 student victims of rape and sexual assault knew the offender.” These assaults often occur near the home of the victim/friend/relative/acquaintance, which means they can happen right on campus in the dorms, fraternity houses, or other areas. As such administrative safety measures should be present enough for the student population to be aware of and help them to feel safer on campus.

This article will explore some of the barriers to reporting, how some students view existing sexual violence prevention efforts, and ways administrators can bridge those gaps.

Students are Uncertain Whether Reporting Will Actually Help

In dealing with the aftermath of being sexually assaulted on her school’s campus, Hayley Himmelman, a Communication student at Northwestern University, felt that the issue of sexual violence has been getting buried at many institutions. To expose the problem, Himmelman produced a play called “Blue Lights,” based on a collection of interviews conducted with fellow NU students that portrays sexual violence, as well as what a healthy relationship looks like.

According to an online article published by the Daily Northwestern, “The play is centered on the University’s blue light phones placed on and off campus, which serve as quick ways to report crime and emergencies.” But the blue lights represent something else to Himmelman: a façade. “…the administration can point to [the blue lights] and say, ‘[t]hat’s, you know, how we protect our students from harm,’” said Himmelman, who believes that the lights give students a “false sense of security.”

The lights are installed. The system is in place. But to students who continue to experience sexual violence—whether at NU or other campuses—they are not enough. Even with these blue lights, or any of the other campus safety resources at their disposal on College and University campuses, many students choose silence over reporting. The reality for Hayley and for many other survivors is that assault can happen even while on campus. Make sure that students have victim support services and confidential counseling to go to for more information.

Alongside ensuring that students know where to go and what to do, it’s crucial that colleges make the reporting process well-known and foster a respectful, victim-centered, and secure environment on campus.

Here are some actions administrators can take on campus to create a safer and more supportive climate:

Increase the presence of campus security patrols on foot and in vehicles

Along with patrolling the more isolated areas on campus, it’s also a good idea to have campus security located in visible and high traffic areas, such as main entrances, and parking lots.

Having security patrol around campus acts both as deterrence for perpetrators, as well as sources who can witness and intervene in a potential assault or an assault in progress.

Have the campus security office be a well-known location so students can get help when needed.

Use emails and flyers to help reach out to the community and enhance communication between administration and the student body

Make these materials non-judgmental, easily accessible, detailed, and containing information such as steps to take before or after an assault and resources to reach out to.

Incorporate educational and prevention programs

“Sexual assault is a learned behavior,” states an article posted by the AAUW. “By fostering a campus culture of gender equity and respect through programming, “Sexual training, and awareness campaigns, faculty and staff can help prevent sexual assault. Faculty can also incorporate the issue of sexual assault into their curriculum whenever possible and whenever relevant to course content. Faculty and staff can also offer student workshops facilitated by trained faculty, staff, and students on campus.”

Even the best-developed program will be ineffective if 75% of the students on campus don’t know about it. Here are some things administrators can do on campus to make sure students know about campus resources:

Organize and participate in public awareness initiatives

Having administrators be present on campus shows students that the school cares about their knowledge and safety, which helps make the campus a more accepting place. Consider which existing campus organizations and resources the school can engage to help set up these initiatives.

The Title IX Coordinator’s information can be included on class syllabi, posted fliers, newsletters, and definitely should be easily found on the school website. An email address, office number, and phone extension are helpful contact options for students to consider when reaching out for help.

Properly addressing reports of sexual violence is crucial to fostering an environment that encourages reporting. The more incidents that go unreported, the less information administrators have about the true scope of the issue.

A survey of about 650 university presidents showed that ‘[a]bout one-third (32 percent) of respondents agree or strongly agree that sexual assault is prevalent at American colleges and universities. But few presidents (6 percent) agree or strongly agree that sexual assault is prevalent at their institution.” With the recognition that sexual assault can happen at any campus, administrators are better able to address and be proactive about tackling the situation on their campus.

In order to reach that level of safety, students must feel comfortable with and confident in the resources provided by their school. Students should know there is someone to talk to and that their claim will be taken seriously. By reaching out to the student body—through training courses, well-marked signs, an easy to navigate website, posters/flyers, and the suggestions listed throughout this post—administrators can better equip students with the knowledge and confidence they need to report.

Though the overall goal is to reduce incidences of sexual misconduct, administrators must first be aware of the magnitude of the issue. A more aware and responsive administration can encourage students to report sexual violence—which informs how administration can resolve sexual violence on campus—and opens the door for further opportunities to support. Increased student reporting and effective administrative response can feed back on each other, creating a safer, more equitable campus.

Here are some additional options to consider:

Some college and university campuses have adopted the use of technology as a tool to enhance safety measures, “like video surveillance, swipe entry cards, emergency text message notification, and blue light emergency phone systems.” Consider which safety methods might be a good addition to a college campus.

Fix every broken or dim light on campus (including parking lots, pathways, halls, and lobbies). Students should be able to see where they are going and who is around them. This can provide benefits like students attending more night classes and reducing other crimes, like theft.

“Get out of the office, walk the campus, and listen to students, staff, and the community,” states a University Business article on creating a more secure campus, “People will feel safer if you are among them. Listening to them can also alleviate quite a bit of anxiety, which often comes out of the feeling that the school foes not care about them individually.”

The administrative burden placed on colleges and universities across the nation by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) “must not be understated,” and FERPA has been described this way: “the law was enacted hastily, poorly written, and, from its adoption, has begged review.” Salzwedel, M. & Ericson, J. “Cleaning Up Buckley.” Wisconsin Law Review, 2003: 1053, 1065. The stakes are also high: federal funds may be withdrawn from a school that has a “policy or practice” of releasing a student’s education records.

But the issues involved are broader than Krakauer’s research for a new book. The US Department of Education filed an amicus brief in the Krakauer case to clarify FERPA principles at issue in the case, and journalists and news media organizations filed an amicus brief to defend freedom of the press. Krakauer’s lawsuit challenges the school’s interpretation of FERPA — the University claims FERPA prohibits disclosing the football player’s private education records. Krakauer’s case was heard by the Montana Supreme Court on April 27th and the court’s decision will provide a rare high court interpretation of the labyrinth of FERPA regulations which school administrators, faculty, and staff must wade through.

The Department of Education’s amicus brief also argued that is has a “strong interest” in UM’s compliance with Title IX, noting UM’s 2013 resolution agreement with the Office for Civil Rights. In its 2014 Q&A on Title IX as well as the 2001 Revised Sexual Harassment Guidance, the Department pointed out the relationship between FERPA and Title IX regarding information about the outcome of a sexual harassment complaint and the due process rights of accused individuals.

Together with Title IX training, educating employees about basic FERPA principles allows them to recognize FERPA issues when handling education records, protecting student privacy rights, and helping schools comply with both their FERPA and Title IX obligations in a wide range of school activities.

On an episode entitled “Anatomy of Doubt” producers of the NPR radio show This American Life teamed up with The Marshall Project and ProPublica to present a story of what can happen when well-meaning people make erroneous assumptions about how victims of sexual assault ought to behave after an attack. The episode recalls the experience of a young woman named Marie who was brutally raped in her home by an intruder. After the attack, Marie called her former foster parents and the police for help. Even though the police found and collected physical evidence of the assault at the scene, Marie’s detached and “flirtatious” behavior caused even those people closest to her to question her truthfulness. This ignited a cascade of doubt and disbelief that erupted into a second trauma for Marie and nearly landed her in jail.

The neurobiology of trauma involves a number of self-protective mechanisms that can produce disruptions in memory and emotional expression in the victim. The amygdala, or the part of the brain responsible for processing fear, interferes with memory consolidation when it is hyper-activated. This may account for lapses in memory or problems with recall in a victim of sexual violence. The body also produces opioids in response to trauma as a way to minimize pain—these endogenous opioids behave similarly to opiates like heroin, and can flatten affect and have adverse effects on memory consolidation. These effects are particularly prevalent for individuals like Marie who have been exposed to trauma during childhood. While complying with the Campus SaVE Act can help educate students on these matters, it is also vitally important for the general public to be aware of the possibility of such reactions in order to minimize incidents of re-traumatization.

The episode also highlights the way in which faulty interviewing techniques can coerce victims into retracting their statement. The police in charge of Marie’s case lacked experience in handling sexual assault cases and presumed that Marie was lying based solely on an inaccurate understanding of how traumatized people are supposed to behave. Their line of questioning was more befitting a suspect of a crime rather than a rape victim. By threatening Marie with the famously faulty polygraph test, they ensured her recantation. Recantations are usually counted as false reports, and those produced under coercive circumstances may therefore inflate the number of false reports. False rape reports are already disproportionately emphasized in the conversation around sexual assault reporting, and the social and legal consequences for reporters who have been determined to be lying are severe.

“Anatomy of Doubt” provides a compelling argument for believing victims. Victims of sexual violence can appear emotionless, carefree, or even cheerful directly following the attack. They may display flirtatious or sexual behavior toward responders, or giggle and laugh at unexpected times. None of these things alone should be taken as an indication that the victim is lying about having been assaulted.

In addition, companies have recently begun offering other novel solutions. Some are manufacturing wearable gadgets that alert authorities and select emergency contacts when an attack is about to occur. A group of college students is developing a nail polish that changes colors when dipped into a drink that’s been laced with certain date-rape drugs. Entrepreneurs are producing an array of fashionable jewelry that emits a loud alarm when the user pushes a button.

Below, you will find a list of some of the sexual assault prevention products on the market and how they work, followed by an analysis, criticisms, and common misconceptions about sexual assault.

iBall Andi Uddaan: This is a cellular device with a built-in “SOS” button that sends an alert message and phone call to five emergency contacts chosen by the user, posts a Facebook status with a pre-written message asking for help and gives the user’s GPS location (only if connected to the Internet), and emits a loud siren sound to ward off potential attackers.

Safelet: A bracelet that sends out alerts with the wearer’s location to the police and emergency contacts (known as “Guardians”) selected by the wearer—this happens when two buttons are pressed simultaneously. Once activated, the device will also call the police and activate the wearer’s cellular microphone, transmitting the sounds coming from the microphone to the police. The wearer can add contacts and security preferences through the Safelet app. The Safelet device operates by using a “secure Bluetooth Low Energy connection.”

Cuff: This is a smart device that can be inserted into the manufacturer’s line of jewelry/accessories (such as a sport band, metal necklaces and bracelets, leather bracelets, and key chains). The device uses a phone app that allows the wearer to set their emergency contacts, and when activated, the Cuff sends the user’s emergency contacts a message. The Cuff device can be paired with any of their jewelry line products to change the look. However, the wearer can’t be more than 20-30 feet from their phone for the device to fully work, and their phone must be connected to the Internet.

Undercover Colors: A nail polish line that detects date rape drugs such as Rohypnol, Ketamine, Ecstasy, and other “roofies” by changing colors when a finger is dipped into a drink to “discreetly” stir. This method can alert the wearer of a spiked drink before they consume it.

Though prevention gadgets are steps in a good direction, they are not solutions to stopping the act that calls for their existence. And for all the good these products attempt to achieve, they come with a fair amount of criticism:

Products such as the aforementioned and others put the burden of rape prevention on the potential victim, not the perpetrators. It is the victims who are going out of their way to obtain and use these products—and while it is a safe, smart thing to ensure one’s safety, perhaps education, accountability, prosecution, and practicing consensual sexual activity should take the forefront.

Marketing these products to women leaves out male victims. According to a Washington Post-Kaiser Family Foundation survey that polled college students living on or near campus, “twenty percent of women and 5 percent of men reported being sexually assaulted either by physical force or while incapacitated.” This survey and many others reveal that both men and women experience sexual assault.

These products are intended to be used before, during, or after a sexual assault has occurred—they do not guarantee that the act will be stopped, that the victim will be safe, or that the attacker will be caught.

Many of these devices also present some practical challenges: they assume the user already has a smartphone, and many of the devices require that a free mobile app be downloaded and connected to the product itself; for the fashion fashion/jewelry pieces, an accessory cover would be needed to better conceal the product; an Internet connection must also be established in order for the devices to correctly work.

Critics’ assertions that these devices misrepresent the nature of sexual assault and unfairly shift the burden to victims show that these devices cannot solve the problem without educational initiatives providing students the proper context.

Fortunately, many colleges, universities, and now high schools in select states require students to take sexual assault prevention programs or classes. With the well of information, definitions, statistics, and scenarios in these courses, the goal is to educate students about consent and sexual assault, leading to better decision-making and ultimately a safer environment.

These products can save lives, but they need to paired with the proper education and training. The goal is to prevent sexual assault, not just avoid it.

The Hunting Ground is a documentary that shares the stories of sexual assault survivors from universities across the country. It not only focuses on the incidents themselves, but the aftermath of the assaults in which their institutions did little to nothing to remediate the situation, and oftentimes retraumatized the survivor by insinuating blame or not believing the survivor’s story.

The Hunting Ground connects the dots to show that campus rape is an epidemic, and that focusing on one individual story, or even one individual institution, isn’t doing justice to the issue. It also frankly discusses the corporatization of higher education and doesn’t shy away from the industrial components that interplay with campus sexual assault.

The film portrays much of what we know to be true about campus sexual assault. Many of the survivors who are featured discuss that the person who assaulted them was someone they knew. Many of the survivors also disclosed that they were hesitant to report through their campus and that they have yet to tell their families. Many survivors shared that the incident involved either members of athletics or Greek life. And sadly, nearly every survivor shared that their school’s response was lacking, harmful, and insufficient.

As found in the Association of American Universities climate survey results, less than a quarter of incidents are reported. The most common reason for not reporting sexual assault was that it was “not considered serious enough,” with high numbers also in feeling “embarrassed or ashamed” and “did not think anything would be done.”

When much of the public discourse around a film about campus sexual assault is disbelief and contention, what is to encourage survivors to report their assault? The Hunting Ground attempts – and succeeds – in showing the epidemic of campus rape, but ironically it is the response to it that succeeds in showing a broader rape culture that permeates beyond college campuses to our entire society.

Instead of discussing the broader implications of the vast amount of evidence and personal stories that The Hunting Ground presents, critics have narrowly focused on trying to disprove two of the most high-profile incidents presented. The acute simplification of focusing on these two cases, one involving a prominent college football quarterback and one involving an elite law school, does a few things. First, it misses the point of the film. By focusing on a couple cases, the representation of campus sexual assault as an epidemic is overlooked. By attempting to prove that the stories presented are inaccurate or incomplete, critics are perpetuating the societal problem of the overestimation of false rape reports. For those who are interested, the actual percentage of false reporting of rape tends to fallbetween 2 and 8%, which aligns with the rate of false accusations for other felonies.

Second, the narrow focus on challenging the two most high-profile cases replicates some of the main institutional problems that the film details. Even though there seems to be strong public support for the film itself – as displayed by the acclaim from Sundance, Entertainment Weekly, Metacritic, and Rotten Tomatoes – media and public discourse have tried to coopt the story by focusing on a sliver of what is truly an epidemic. Perhaps it is no coincidence that the majority of attention has been focused on these two cases; the two where the American society has the most to lose. There seems to be a willful ignorance that is reinforcing the sense that when the accused institution or individual is high-profile, with high societal regard and yielding high profits, the public is predisposed to doubt the survivor. Not only is the survivor unlikely to be believed, but there is a heavy investment in advocating for the innocence of the accused, even going as far as to blaming and shaming the accuser. When the fault in a sexual assault case lands upon a person or institution that is highly funded, positively regarded, a national symbol of success, etc., there is little chance that the survivor will come out on top.

But maybe there is hope. Is any attention good attention when it comes to these issues? The survivors who present their stories in The Hunting Ground have decided to put the cause before themselves. They have become activists and have sacrificed their personal well-being to do so. The individuals seen in the film have received threats, are constantly being questioned and challenged, and in many cases are being portrayed in negative light. However, they have also forced the issue of campus rape into the national headlines. They have put the rape epidemic on the map and are forcing the media and public to take note. As campus administrators, invested community members, and social justice educators, we owe something to these, and all, survivors. An easy way to remember how to support survivors is through the acronym HEAL: Honor, Empower, Accept, and Listen. The following screen shots from Think About It are a good baseline for how to respond when someone discloses sexual assault. If you hear people challenging the stories of the survivors in The Hunting Ground, remind them of these suggestions.

Sexual Assault Campus Climate Surveys are a hot topic for student affairs administrators around the country. Some schools have administered internal climate surveys, some have utilized prepared climate surveys from the AAU or HEDS, and others are in the process of developing and implementing climate surveys. While climate surveys are not yet federally required (although some states are now mandating them and the OCR has required them of schools under investigation), the government has urged schools to adequately assess the climate on their campuses through climate surveys.

At CampusClarity, we do more than just help reach Title IX & Campus SaVE compliance. We strive to eliminate sexual and dating violence on college campuses and beyond. Because climate surveys are considered a best practice for gauging campus climate, we have developed a tool that will help campus administrators tackle the huge task of building climate surveys.

Over the past few months, our product development team has dedicated countless hours to learning from others, developing best practices, and engineering a platform that will allow administrators to simply and swiftly build campus climate surveys. Our platform has many unique features made specifically for campus climate surveys, such as built in content/trigger warnings, a landing page for IRB approval, and default settings that will help increase completion rates. Perhaps most useful is that all data collected will go into the same LMS with data from Think About It and our other courses. Data can be cross tabulated by demographic, and will be delivered with sample size protection as to not out students with underrepresented identities.

We partnered with Callisto, a sexual assault reporting tool for colleges, to host a webinar revealing our climate survey platform. Callisto allows schools to collect data all year round about incidence and prevalence of sexual assault. When partnered with climate surveys, Callisto can provide administrators the information they need to provide prevention, risk reduction, and awareness education on campus. View the below webinar to learn more about climate survey best practices, Callisto, and CampusClarity’s new product.

Today, the Association of American Universities released aggregate data from the climate survey it conducted at 27 of its member campuses. The results reinforced some of the findings from other campus climate surveys, but also revealed startling new information about how students respond that could inform campus’s prevention programs.

The AAU report says that “the primary goal of the Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct was to provide…information to inform policies to prevent and respond to sexual assault and misconduct.” They survey assessed the incidence and prevalence of sexual assault, the perceptions of risk, the knowledge of resources, and the likelihood of action.

Just over 150,000 students participated in the survey, giving a response rate of around 19%. When students were offered a $5 Amazon gift card, their response rate was 9.3% higher than when they were offered drawing entry or no incentive. The response rate for females was 7.3% higher than for males. Results varied across the 27 campuses who administered the AAU survey, and it is expected that many schools will release their individual data as well. Although the response rate was lower than desired, this survey gives us one of the largest data pools of its kind.

Overall, there are some findings that are consistent across all campuses.

The most common reason for not reporting sexual assault was that it was “not considered serious enough,” with high numbers also in feeling “embarrassed or ashamed” and “did not think anything would be done.”

Over a quarter of senior females reported experiencing sexual contact by force or incapacitation since entering college.

Some of the most interesting results of the findings related to perception of risk and bystander behaviors. Around 20% believe that sexual assault is very or extremely problematic on their campus, but only 5% thought that it was very likely that they would experience it. Over half of students who had witnessed someone acting sexually violent or harassing said they did nothing to intervene. Over three quarters of students who had witnessed a drunk person heading for a sexual encounter said they did nothing to intervene.

What does this mean for student affairs professionals and college administrators? There are a number of action-steps that can be taken from the information gathered through this survey.

Sexual assault and misconduct are massive problems on college campuses, and not isolated to individual institutions who are in the media.

Even when people believe sexual assault is a rampant problem on their campus, they are unlikely to believe it could happen to them. Students need to be given a realistic understanding about the context of sexual assault on college campuses.

Although very few students reported through official means, most students told a friend. Students need the resources and tools to be able to help friends who have experienced sexual assault or misconduct.

Students didn’t report for a number of reasons, but most frequently because they did not consider it serious enough. If schools want accurate reporting numbers, they need to send a clear message of what is included in sexual assault or misconduct policies.

If you’d like to learn more about climate surveys and discuss ways that you can develop your own or use the aggregate data from the AAU survey to inform your campus programming, join us on Tuesday, October 13th for a webinar with Jessica Ladd from Sexual Health Innovations and Peter Novak from the University of San Francisco. Register at http://bit.ly/1KP34ZT.

On April 29, 2014, the White House Task Force issued its “Not Alone” report with an overview of how to plan and conduct a campus sexual assault climate survey, as well as a sample survey based on best practices. The report urges “schools to show they’re serious about the problem by conducting the survey next year.”

In a May 2015 article, “Climate Surveys Are Coming,” readers were told, “The task force’s suggestion that schools conduct climate surveys is one of several signals that surveys soon will be required as part of a Title IX/Clery Act compliance program.”

On the same day that the White House report came out, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights issued the guidance document, “Questions & Answers on Title IX and Sexual Violence,” which listed conducting climate surveys as one of the ways to “limit the effects of the alleged sexual violence and prevent its recurrence,” if a victim requests confidentiality and does not want formal action taken against the alleged perpetrator.

Instead of waiting for federal laws or Title IX guidance that mandate climate surveys, some states have already enacted laws requiring them:

MarylandHouse Bill 571 requires institutions of higher education to “DEVELOP AN APPROPRIATE SEXUAL ASSAULT CAMPUS CLIMATE SURVEY, USING NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED BEST PRACTICES FOR RESEARCH AND CLIMATE SURVEYS,” and submit to the Maryland Higher Education Commission on or before June 1, 2016 (and every two years thereafter), a report aggregating the data collected by the survey, including:

1. Types of misconduct

2. Outcome of each complaint

3. Disciplinary actions taken by institutions

4. Accommodations made to students

5. Number of reports involving alleged nonstudent perpetrators

The New York “Enough is Enough” law signed on July 7, 2015, requires all New York colleges and universities to conduct campus climate surveys at least every other year. The survey requirement goes into effect on July 7, 2016.

The State of Washington passed a new law (SSB 5518.SL), requiring state universities, the regional universities, The Evergreen State College, the community colleges, and the technical colleges to conduct a campus climate survey and report their findings to the governor and legislature by December 31, 2016.

Louisiana passed a new law (SB 255) which provides, “When funding is made available, each public postsecondary education institution shall administer an annual, anonymous sexual assault climate survey to its students.”

In addition, the Massachusetts legislature is considering Bill S. 650, which would create a task force to develop a sexual assault climate survey to be administered by colleges and universities selected by the task force.

Meanwhile, Boston University launched a student survey in March 2015 (see FAQs about BU’s survey) and, while not required by law, the University of California conducted a campus climate survey on its campuses in Spring 2013 (see results and FAQs). Previously, we’ve reported on published data from other climate surveys, what experts say, and how to get started.

With Congress back in session, the Campus Accountability and Safety Act may have gained some momentum from the July 29th hearing before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions. Testimony received at that hearing included strong support from the Association of American Universities for campus climate surveys, pointing out that it is important that schools directly or indirectly control survey administration so that it addresses the unique circumstances of individual campuses.

We will continue to watch this closely as the patchwork quilt of climate survey requirements continues to unfold. We will also be hosting a webinar on Tuesday, October 13th with Peter Novak from University of San Francisco and Jessica Ladd from Sexual Health Innovations about climate surveys and data. Follow our twitter account @CampusClarity for the link to register as the date gets closer.

Our primary focus has been on federal legislation to address campus sexual violence, including the pending HALT and CASA bills, as well as the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 regulations that become effective July 1, 2015.

However, there have been a number of recent state law developments that pose additional challenges to many school administrators across the country. Below is a snapshot of some of the current state requirements for responding to and preventing campus sexual violence.

California
Previously, we reported on California’s “Yes Means Yes” law, which requires California’s colleges and universities receiving state funds for student financial aid to adopt a policy that defines what does and does not constitute consent to sexual activity. The law also has a July 1, 2015 deadline to have policies in place to ensure reports of violent crime, hate crime, and sexual assault received by campus security authorities are immediately disclosed to local law enforcement. To help schools comply with this requirement, California Attorney General Kamala Harris released a Model Memorandum of Understanding, which Harris said “will help break down silos between campuses and law enforcement agencies to provide sexual assault victims with the help they need and hold more perpetrators accountable.” This MOU adopts best practices for collaboration between school officials and law enforcement agencies, including: clarifying their respective duties following an assault, working together to connect victims to services, and providing regular training for campus and law enforcement communities.

Colorado
On May 4, 2015, Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper signed HB 15-1220, which requires agreements between public and private colleges and universities and medical or other facilities where sexual assault victims can receive medical and forensic exams. Schools also need to make transportation to these facilities and referrals to advocates available to victims, and have sexual assault training and response policies.

Connecticut
Over the past several months, Connecticut has enacted laws to:

allow an anonymous reporting option, and require annual reports to the legislature on the school’s policies, victim rights, crime reports, and the number of disciplinary cases with final outcomes (HB 2059)

Connecticut Senate Bill 636 is currently pending, which would establish an affirmative consent standard similar to California’s to be applied in sexual assault and intimate partner violence cases.

Illinois
Both Houses of the Illinois legislature have passed HB 821, the Preventing Sexual Violence in Higher Education Act, requiring colleges and universities to adopt comprehensive policies to address campus sexual violence. If signed by the governor, this Act will require schools to provide survivors’ notification of their rights and options, confidential advisors, and emergency and ongoing support. In addition, schools would need to establish one procedure to resolve complaints and provide sexual violence awareness training and education.

conduct climate surveys on or before June 1, 2016, and every two years thereafter

submit reports to the Higher Education Commission on sexual assault data gathered, including number of complaints received, disciplinary action taken, and victim accommodations made, beginning on October 1, 2016, and every two years thereafter

pursue agreements with local law enforcement and local rape crisis programs

provide amnesty from code of conduct violations for alcohol or drugs to students who make good faith reports of sexual assault and witnesses who participate in investigations

Effective October 1, 2015, Maryland SB 477 adds victims of dating violence (who have had a sexual relationship with the offender within the past year) to the list of persons eligible for protective orders that provide broader protection for a longer period of time.

designate a staff member at student health or counseling centers as a confidential resource

New York
New York’s “Enough is Enough” bill has passed both houses and is expected to be signed by Governor Cuomo. This legislation codifies a sexual assault prevention policy already adopted by all 64 SUNY campuses, requiring public and private colleges and universities with New York campuses to adopt policies that:

define consent as a clear, unambiguous and voluntary agreement to engage in specific sexual activity

grant immunity for students reporting incidents of sexual assault or violence from certain campus policy violations, such as drug or alcohol use

provide a Bill of Rights to all students, informing them of their legal rights and available resources, including outside law enforcement

require comprehensive training for administrators, staff, and students

North Dakota
Effective August 1, 2015, Senate Bill 2150 was signed by North Dakota’s governor, making it the third state (see North Carolina General Statutes § 116-40.11 and Arkansas Act 1194) to allow students facing suspension or expulsion the right to be represented by an attorney or non-attorney advocate who may fully participate during disciplinary proceedings involving matters other than academic misconduct.

Oregon
Effective June 10, 2015, HB 3476 prohibits disclosure of communications with victims of sexual violence when they seek help from counselors and advocates unless the victim consents.

Effective January 1, 2016, SB 790 requires school districts to adopt policies that incorporate domestic violence education into training programs for students in grades 7-12 and school employees.

Texas
On June 13, 2015, Texas Governor Greg Abbott signed a “campus carry” bill into law, which allows students who are 21 or older to carry concealed firearms on public and certain private college and university campuses. Before the law goes into effect on August 1, 2016, Senate Bill 11 allows school administrators to designate gun-free zones on campus and establish rules for storing handguns in dorms and other residential facilities, but those restrictions may not generally prohibit students from carrying handguns on campus.

the information must be reported to the Title IX coordinator “as soon as practicable after addressing the immediate needs of the victim”

the Title IX coordinator must meet within 72 hours with the review committee, which includes representatives of law enforcement and student affairs

if the allegations involve felony sexual assault the law enforcement representative must consult with a local prosecutor within 24 hours (however, personally identifiable information about persons involved will not be disclosed unless it is necessary to protect the victim or others)

schools must have a memorandum of understanding with a local sexual assault crisis center or other victim support service to connect victim with those services

Additionally, SB 1193 enacted on April 30, 2015, requires schools to include a “prominent notation” on the academic record of anyone who is suspended or dismissed for a sexual violence offense, or withdraws while under investigation. However, the notation will be removed if the student completes the disciplinary action and is thereafter deemed a student in good standing.

all institutions of higher education to establish one disciplinary process for sexual violence complaints

four-year institutions to conduct campus climate surveys to assess the prevalence of campus sexual assault, evaluate student and employee attitudes and awareness of campus sexual violence issues, and make recommendations for addressing and preventing sexual violence on and off campus

report survey results to the legislature by December 31, 2016

report on steps taken to enter into memoranda of understanding with local law enforcement by July 1, 2016